All SPF owners check area under pass side pipe

madmaxx · #1 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 04:54 AM

As I am become a SPF addict and now on my third I have found a common issue. The supplied motor mounts are not up to the task. They allow the engine to rotate under torque which allows the side pipe to smash into the bottom of the opening on the passenger side. This deforms and cracks the area. Either get the energy absorb mounts, go solid or use a chain to prevent the engine from rolling over. Chain looks tacky IMO but better. Than damage.

ha_pe_1968 · #2 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madmaxx

As I am become a SPF addict and now on my third I have found a common issue. The supplied motor mounts are not up to the task. They allow the engine to rotate under torque which allows the side pipe to smash into the bottom of the opening on the passenger side. This deforms and cracks the area. Either get the energy absorb mounts, go solid or use a chain to prevent the engine from rolling over. Chain looks tacky IMO but better. Than damage.

Hi!

Try the Olthoff Polyurethane mounts...problem should be solved then. Even with that mounts it can be tight at the passenger side - but no contact to the fiberglass.

Peter

madmaxx · #3 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 05:31 AM

Exactly!!! Those work, I tested them many times on my last one!

QUOTE=ha_pe_1968;1273647]Hi!

Try the Olthoff Polyurethane mounts...problem should be solved then. Even with that mounts it can be tight at the passenger side - but no contact to the fiberglass.

Peter[/quote]

Mark IV · #4 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 07:38 AM

There are no "supplied" motor mounts on an SPF, they are whatever the installer uses. SPF does not supply them with the chassis, only the engine pedistals. Olthoff uses the poly mounts as standard on the install they do. Many cars have been done with parts store Chinese mounts which are not up to the torque especially on Windsor applications.

A friend does Boss 302 restorations and has found the aftermarket engine mounts for Windsors can be off in the vertical dimension by as much as 1/2" placing the air cleaner or Shaker too high in the chassis. Due to the design the FE mounts are less of a concern but still the poly mounts are worthwhile.

SPF1061 · #5 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 08:00 AM

Motor Mounts - Olthoff Racing

Mark IV · #6 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 08:25 AM

Also remember there are spacers to use under the engine pedistals to center the pipe in the opening as well as the "wedge" spacers for the sidepipe to header connection. The wedge spacers can raise, lower or move the sidepipe fore/aft in the opening.

A friends MK III needed a wedge on the left side to raise the pipe away from the bottom of the opening. We didn't want to raise the left side of the motor as it was within 3/16" of being level in the chassis.

blown871 · #7 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 10:17 AM

wow; thanks for the info .
this may explain why there is pre existing damage in the opening bottom exit area on the body on my car.

Jim Kellogg · #8 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 10:54 AM

Good info, MK IV

As Rick stated, the motor mounts are NOT SPF, but rather a choice of the installer. Some choose good, some do not.

My original installer also used standard rubber mounts, and I also experienced rubbing of the RH side pipe against the opening. Also due in part to my many high rpm burnouts

I upgraded to the Olthoff mounts years ago. They fit perfectly, and have held up well through the years since. Highly recommended by me if you are not currently running them on your Windsor SPF build, even if you are not experiencing motor mount issues right now.

Good catch, madmax, but I would not bother with the chains but rather install good high performance mounts that are up to the task

Jim

Mark IV · #9 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Kellogg

Also due in part to my many high rpm burnouts

No, I don't believe that for a moment!

vatdevil · #10 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 01:50 PM

Can anyone please detail how to replace the mounts? What all needs removed?

Mark IV · #11 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vatdevil

Can anyone please detail how to replace the mounts? What all needs removed?

Easy to do. Tools and a jack with some wood blocks. Remove the cross bolts from the insulators to the pedestal. Jack the engine up an inch or so and remove the bolts that hold the insulator to the block. Trash existing mounts. Remove pedestals from frame brackets and modify as per Olthoff instructions (you do own a hacksaw?). Reverse procedure. Start car, drive car, have fun.............

madmaxx · #12 (**permalink**) 11-27-2013, 01:53 PM

Thank Goodness they are not SPF supplied. I was ging to post a nasty post. Idiot assss installers. I love cleaning up their messes.

CBattaglia · #13 (**permalink**) 11-28-2013, 08:19 AM

Same problem here. The torque from the 460 broke the rubber mount on the passenger side. Went with olthoff poly mounts. All good and you feel a little more of the car with them too.

madmaxx · #14 (**permalink**) 11-28-2013, 08:42 AM

Yes I am an spf expert relative to 99.99999% of the people out there. Blas would be the .000001% that knows more than me.

Bernica · #15 (**permalink**) 11-28-2013, 10:05 AM

This problem is not confined to SPF's.My CSX 4000 has the same issue.

In my case with an FE, it becomes more complicated in that if I raise the right side of the motor to center the pipes in the opening, I then have the drivers side almost touching the footbox and interfering with the linkage. Been struggling with that one for a while. I suspect that the footbox would need to move over to make things right. Now there's a fun little project!

madmaxx · #16 (**permalink**) 11-29-2013, 09:31 AM

Use a chain. Prob solved

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bernica

This problem is not confined to SPF's.My CSX 4000 has the same issue.

In my case with an FE, it becomes more complicated in that if I raise the right side of the motor to center the pipes in the opening, I then have the drivers side almost touching the footbox and interfering with the linkage. Been struggling with that one for a while. I suspect that the footbox would need to move over to make things right. Now there's a fun little project!

Got the Bug · #17 (**permalink**) 11-29-2013, 10:03 AM

I went with the Olthoff motor mounts from the beginning. There's not much clearance on the passenger side, but I've seen no damage to the body after 7 years.

What about the poly transmission mounts? Is that a good updgrade?

Jim Kellogg · #18 (**permalink**) 11-29-2013, 10:50 AM

I changed my transmission mount to poly during my last motor upgrade. I previously had been running Olthoff front poly mounts and a rubber trans mount. I read lots of pros and cons about going all poly on the mounts (mostly against), but decided to try it out.

Not sure if it was the only reason, but my wheel hop disppeared after changing the trans mount to poly. I also dialed in the rear alignment at the same time, which should have also helped reduce wheel hop. My old rubber trans mount was in rough shape - over 60,000 miles of hard driving with many burnouts and who knows what else!

Either way, I recommend the poly trans mount along with the poly engine mounts. I purchased my trans mount from Performance Unlimited.
Cobra Valley's Poly Transmission Mount

I have experienced no problems with engine vibration utilizing all poly mounts.
Jim Kellogg